The Federal Court granted leave to reopen the trial and admit new evidence in a matter under reserve, in which no reasons or judgement have issued.
The Plaintiffs sent a letter to the Court indicating that they wished to correct evidence that was unknowingly inaccurate at the time it was led. A new file was discovered, resulting in the inventor having a different recollection of events than his testimony before the Court disclosed. The Defendants brought the motion to reopen.
The Court held that the question to ask in this situation is whether the evidence, if it had been presented, could influence the result. The Court then considered the due diligence of the parties, but held that “any lack of due diligence must be tempered by the crucial factor that a court should not be misled as to the true facts.”